Guest column: Nation's financial system lacks consumer orientation

Change ... We need change! That was the mantra from the last presidential election. We still need change and one especially important facet of our government that impacts upon our daily lives is the banking system. Over the past 20 or so years, Congress, your representatives, have allowed dramatic changes that have drastically changed our financial system, not only in how it works, but in the responsibilities of the parties involved.

The current system like other government programs does not work in your favor. If you need refreshing, just think about the bailouts of the past few years not only of banks in the United States, but the international banking system that bought into bundled “investments” (highly rated securities) that were found to be much less in value than the ratings provided.

This gamesmanship carried out by our centralized banking system bet on gains having assurance that they were “too big to fail.” This corrupt system was brought about over a number of years by financial lobbying interests.

Big rewards for bank executives and staff became the routine and expected. Losses by institutions frequently had no impact on executive payments.

Looking back, according to data from the Dallas Federal Reserve, reporting from 1970 to 2010, the five largest institutions in the United States owned 17 percent of banking assets. In 2010 that share increased to 52 percent (Wall Street Journal-Frost, May 16, 2012)

For example: The banking system throughout the U.S. has changed from consumer-oriented. Do you remember in the past when a local lending institution required down payments and evaluated your ability to pay the loan?

Local banks / mortgage companies often took only applications for loans and were paid for that service and took no risk on the loan or other related responsibilities. Big institutions took over the loan risks.

Some changes, I believe, are needed to bring consumer orientation to the current financial distortion and reduce taxpayer losses.

1. Decentralize the banking system. The local bank’s primary role should be that of supporting community development.

2. Separate equity investment from credit/loan functions including hedge funds. Transparency to equity investors needs to be the rule.

I question the value of the pseudo government Federal Reserve System and its complicity in devaluing the taxpayers’ dollars through the printing process with our currency. Government auditing, on at least a periodic basis of FRS and a report to the public with summary assessment and recommendations, should be required.

While the above is a start, and not original thinking, the past Glass–Steagal Act of 1933 served us well until the 1990s.

■

Henry C. Warner was a program analyst for the U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare until the U.S. Department of Education was formed. He served as a state representative for state agencies within U.S. Region V (Chicago) with a special designation as a communicative disorders specialist. Later, he was an assistant regional commissioner, DHEW, Social and Rehabilitation Service. After moving to St. Augustine, he became a registered representative of the National Association of Security Dealers.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Its permeated all through Corporate America, Republicans like to tout about our "Free Market" but we do not have "free market" if we had it there would be a lot more competition. Corporate America in now operatng on the premise that "we owe them our business" thus they do not have to treat us like "customers". Example: the other day I went to pay my AT&T bill, ( insert expletive here ) wanted to charge me to bay my bill ! What ! I now have to pay them in order to pay them? What kind of ( expletive ) is that. Then they thanked me for doing business with them to which my reply was " who the ( expletive ) else am I going to use. The AT&T monopoly was broken up a long time ago and congress fell asleep while they re-monopolized it. Later that very same day I went to a customers office, they had installed AT&T's u-verse internet, the service rendered part of the office equipment equipment in-operable putting them out of busness. 2 hours of making phone calls to 15 different numbers produced unsatisfactory results. AT&T also told the customer once you go to U-verse you cannot go back to DSL, is my customer suppossed to shell out another 10 grand for new office equipment just to satisfy AT&T ? This is just one example but its permeated all through corporate America. As businessman myself I'm all for a fair and honest profit, but its no longer fair nor honest !

I doubt that business ever had a "consumer orientation". Pleasing the customer was always a necessary evil that had to be done to earn money and something that was known as "customer loyalty". This later term is not even in the business lexicon, now days.
Bank of America lost my business in record time by virtue of juggling policies-I never knew which one they'd be enforcing when I walked through the door. None seemed to be in my favor.
As for AT&T, they are a lost cause. After I left, they contacted me for a business survey. AT&T: "Why did you leave AT&T?" Me: "Because I wanted to make a phone call." AT&T: "Why did you go to Verizon?"
Me: "Because I wanted to make a phone call." AT&T: "What do you like about Verizon better than AT&T?" Me: "I can make a phone call."
It's not rocket science.
As for competition between businesses, I'm convinced that it is mostly illusion. In many cases, you have no real choice. At one of our homes, we still have AT&T home phone and Internet. Why? It's all there is. Believe me, if there were another realistic choice, we'd be gone.
We have Dish Network. Why? It's all there is.
Oh, AT&T Customer Service? There is an urban rumor that the company has such a service. Partly true. They have at least one operator. That person is busy with someone else. That's an unbreakable rule. SHE'S BUSY WITH SOMEONE ELSE.
However, it is possible to write their HQ and old fashioned paper letter. And someone will probably answer you back in a month or two. They won't call because you can't receive calls on your AT&T cell phone.
But they will write you back. Conversations take forever but some action does take place.